Is one entitled to more than one opinion/viewpoint?

Post Reply New Topic

I have been thinking of a fascinating concept recently; are people allowed/should people have more than one view on the same issue(s)? Also, can one possibly not have a viewpoint at all?

For example, one person may be more in favour of voting in one direction as a parent, but in another direction as a businessman.

Or, an animal rights supporter could be against harming animals, but would gladly do their best to wound a lion that tries to kill them.

As to not having a viewpoint, I thought of this because I literally doubt and consider everything, and every possible option to take, or what could happen, or as to the nature of something (e.g. society, the universe, et cetera). It is pretty miserable, because I cannot be sure of anything.

So what are some opinions of people out there?

The issue there is not cruelty but the preservation of one's own life. Context. Context. Context.

ruveyn

There are many areas where I do not have an opinion, or do not have an opinion yet, or no longer have an opinion.

There are even more when I can see strong arguments on two or more sides of the issue.

AND even where I have a firm position I still see more than one side.

i can't place the person who said it, but some smart man of letters said [paraphrasing] that it takes an exceptional mind to be able to simultaneously entertain 2 diametrically opposed viewpoints.

Is one entitled to more than one opinion/viewpoint? Yes. Even when one has an opinion, the opinion can be expressed in one sentence, one paragraph, one chapter, one book, or a series of books or simply say nothing at all about the topic. Disclaimer: My view is subject to change with or without notice. In some elections, a voter may vote for a certain candidate today but in four years, when there is a reelection, vote for someone else.

In a way, although I suspect this perhaps isn't quite what you mean:

I think it's possible to have a particular viewpoint on an issue (abortion, smoking, religion, whatever) and to be of a firmly held belief that XYZ is so and you think other people should also have the same opinion and values... while simultaneously being of the opinion that it's okay for other people to believe and do the opposite, not because you approve or condone it, but because you can appreciate that one's own views are one's own and one doesn't necessarily have the right to impose those views on other people.

That's an odd use of the words "entitled" and "allowed", as though people needed permission to have certain thoughts.

People can think whatever they want. Are you asking if it's possible or common to hold apparently opposing viewpoints that vary depending on context? It's both possible and common.

Not really, for it is either-or at the voting booth. Until then, one simply has yet to decide.

On many issues I have no opinions, only a variety of stories. Multiple threads, any of which could be true. I like to leave them loose, rather than pin one down as my faith.

The craving of surety is something that can be overcome. Getting comfortable in living in a fluid, impermanent reality is a way to growth and freedom.

Or, becoming comfortable with one's own thinking being fluid and impermanent can be a way to achieve surety.

I can be a bit like this, in terms of being able to appreciate lots of different opinions and points of view, but not necessarily having a firm view of my own if it's not an issue I feel strongly about one way or the other.

I think that flexibility is important to the decision making process, I know there are may issue in which I have conflicted feelings even after having made the decision on which option to support. If nothing else, the ability to really understand multiple viewpoints on a given issue is very helpful in arguing why you think your view is the correct one.

What about schizoids who are beside themselves most of the time.

ruveyn